Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Israel Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: land for promise
sofa    1/16/2007 8:57:59 AM
from lgf: "http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/813817.html" http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/813817.html -------- In a series of secret meetings in Europe between September 2004 and July 2006, Syrians and Israelis formulated understandings for a peace agreement between Israel and Syria. The main points of the understandings are as follows: An agreement of principles will be signed between the two countries, and following the fulfillment of all commitments, a peace agreement will be signed. As part of the agreement on principles, Israel will withdraw from the Golan Heights to the lines of 4 June, 1967. The timetable for the withdrawal remained open: Syria demanded the pullout be carried out over a five-year period, while Israel asked for the withdrawal to be spread out over 15 years. At the buffer zone, along Lake Kinneret, a park will be set up for joint use by Israelis and Syrians. The park will cover a significant portion of the Golan Heights. Israelis will be free to access the park and their presence will not be dependent on Syrian approval. Israel will retain control over the use of the waters of the Jordan River and Lake Kinneret. According to the terms, Syria will also agree to end its support for Hezbollah and Hamas and will distance itself from Iran. The document is described as a "non-paper," a document of understandings that is not signed and lacks legal standing - its nature is political. It was prepared in August 2005 and has been updated during a number of meetings in Europe. The meetings were carried out with the knowledge of senior officials in the government of former prime minister Ariel Sharon. The last meeting took place during last summer's war in Lebanon.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Herald12345       5/3/2008 1:50:11 PM

I've read the books and time and again the mantra is Don't negotiate with terrorists, don't give them any political recognition, but in reality terrorists are always negotiated with. I may not agree with it, I may not like it, I may think that it is damaging, but that still isn't going to stop this. (Instances are Israel with Fatah, Clinton/the US not arresting Bin Laden when they had the chance)

Now why should I consider any strategy which require actions that will just not happen in the real world. In my opinion any effective counter terror strategy will have to take into consideration that negotiations with terrorists will happen, how unfortunate that might be.

It's the same with hostage situations every book says Do not give in to the hostage taker's demand, yet that is exactly what happens all the time. So if you wanna do something about kidnappers, then you have to face up to this unpalatable thruth.

It just ain't gonna happen.




Talk is okay, negotiation never.

When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite. [Winston Churchill on formal declaration of war]

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       5/3/2008 2:39:12 PM



I've read the books and time and again the mantra is Don't negotiate with terrorists, don't give them any political recognition, but in reality terrorists are always negotiated with. I may not agree with it, I may not like it, I may think that it is damaging, but that still isn't going to stop this. (Instances are Israel with Fatah, Clinton/the US not arresting Bin Laden when they had the chance)

Now why should I consider any strategy which require actions that will just not happen in the real world. In my opinion any effective counter terror strategy will have to take into consideration that negotiations with terrorists will happen, how unfortunate that might be.

It's the same with hostage situations every book says Do not give in to the hostage taker's demand, yet that is exactly what happens all the time. So if you wanna do something about kidnappers, then you have to face up to this unpalatable thruth.

It just ain't gonna happen.





Talk is okay, negotiation never.


When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
[Winston Churchill on formal
declaration of war]


Herald
I don't think it is harmful as long as one gets ones own back within enough time to maintain the reputation. Ransom the hostage. Then when the hostage returns, off the hostage-taker.

 
Quote    Reply

FJV       5/3/2008 6:11:08 PM
I'm all for just killing terrorists, but if you ask me whether I have ever seen that happen since the 1980's then I would have to answer no. That's why I think proposing such strategies are not realistic and I don't see any indication of change. For me this is a truth that I'ld rather not see, but still it's seems to me what's happening. Don't you ever wonder why Kim Jung Ill is still alive?

Il'd rather have imperfect strategies that will "work" within the real world limitations instead of ideal strategies based on assumptions that are unrealistic. For years I have been talking about if only they would stop negotiating with terrorists, or If only they would stop making deals with double faced govts., or if only the media stopped glorifying the terrorists as freedom fighters, if only they would show the flaws in the utopian ideology, if only they would.....

The fact is that they never will and any strategy that will have work in the real world has deal with that. All I'm saying is that you better have a plan ready (PR or whatever) for when Carter start unathorized "peace" talks with terrorists or when CNN decides to give a front group for terrorism plenty of free time on air to spout their propaganda. Etc, etc, etc...



 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics